Exploring Existentially-Based Interventions For Career Transitions in Sport

From Introduction: Career transition issues have become of increasing interest in the field of sport psychology. Confronting the end of an athletic career is an inevitable reality that every athlete will confront in his or her lifetime (Baillie, 1993), regardless of level of competition (Kerr & Dacyshyn, 2000) or the amount of free choice related to the transition. Many athletes are able to cope with the effects of the transition process effectively, and see retirement as an opportunity to pursue new ventures and identity roles in life. However, retirement from sport can be an event that often results in various adjustment difficulties for an athlete involving emotional, social, financial, and vocational conflicts. Some athletes have reported experiencing effects such as depression, eating disorders, decreased self-esteem, increased suicidality, and substance abuse (Kerr and Dacyshyn, 2000). These types of distress can be exacerbated by the fact that many athletes fail to adequately anticipate and prepare for their impending transition (Baillie, 1993), and often embark on the retirement process without any formalized support (Stier, 2007).Typically, the role of a sport psychologist has been to assist in maximizing an athlete's competitive performance during the course of their career. However, as a sport psychologist's primary responsibility is to serve active competitors and athletic organizations, this tends to come at the expense of failing to provide follow-up care for the athlete as he or she retires from sport (Taylor, Ogilvie, and Lavallee, 2006). Since the 1970's, when the efforts of professionals in European sports organizations first received attention, there has been growing interest in academic circles about career transition

Sustainable Development and its Discontents

Sustainable development (or sustainability) is a decision-making framework for maintaining and achieving human well-being, both in the present and into the future. The framework requires both consideration and achievement of environmental protection, social justice and economic development. In that framework, environmental protection must be integrated into decisions about social and economic development, and social justice and economic viability must be integrated into decisions about environmental quality. First endorsed by the world’s nations in 1992, this framework is intended to provide an effective response to the twin global challenges of growing environmental degradation and widespread extreme poverty. Sustainability provides a framework for humans to live in harmony with nature, rather than at nature’s expense. It may therefore be one of the most important ideas to come out of the 20th century. In the last two decades, the framework has become a touchstone in nearly every economic sector and at every level of government, unleashing an extraordinary range of creativity in all of those realms. Sustainable development is having a significant effect on the practice of law and on the way in which laws are written and implemented. Understanding the framework is increasingly important for law makers and lawyers. As sustainable development (or sustainability) has grown in prominence, its critics have become more numerous and more vocal. Three major lines of criticism are that the term is “too boring” to command public attention, “too vague” to provide guidance, and “too late” to address the world’s problems. Critics suggest goals such as abundance, environmental integrity, and resilience. Beginning with the international agreements that shaped the concept of sustainable development, this Article provides a functional and historical analysis of the meaning of sustainable development. It then analyzes and responds to each of these criticisms in turn. While the critics, understood constructively, suggest ways of strengthening this framework, they do not provide a compelling alternative. The challenge for lawyers, law makers, and others is to use and improve this framework to make better decisions.